Risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol: RCT including 1050 first IVF/ICSI cycles
Abstract STUDY QUESTION Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?. SUMMARY ANSWER There is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist grou...
Saved in:
Published in | Human reproduction (Oxford) Vol. 31; no. 6; pp. 1253 - 1264 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
England
Oxford University Press
01.06.2016
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 0268-1161 1460-2350 1460-2350 |
DOI | 10.1093/humrep/dew051 |
Cover
Abstract | Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?.
SUMMARY ANSWER
There is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist group compared with the short GnRH antagonist protocol.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?
In the most recent Cochrane review, the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a similar live birth rate (LBR), a similar on-going pregnancy rate (OPR), and a lower incidence of OHSS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33–0.57) compared with the traditional GnRH agonist protocol. Previous trials comparing the two protocols mainly included selected patient populations, a limited number of patients and the applied OHSS criteria differed, making direct comparisons difficult. In two recent large meta-analyses, no significant differences in LBR (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72–1.02) or in the incidence of severe OHSS were reported, while others found a lower LBR (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68–0.97) and a reduced risk of severe OHSS using the GnRH antagonist protocol (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40–0.88).
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
Phase IV, dual-centre, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to either short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio and enrolled over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. This is a superiority study designed to detect a difference in severe OHSS, the primary outcome, between the two groups with a power of 80% and stratified for age, assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic and planned fertilization procedure (IVF/ICSI). The secondary aims were to compare rates of mild and moderate OHSS, positive plasma (p)-hCG, on-going pregnancy and live birth between the two arms. None of the women had undergone previous ART treatment.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
All infertile women referred for their first IVF/ICSI at two public fertility clinics, less than 40 years of age and with no uterine malformations were asked to participate. A total of 1099 subjects were randomized, including women with poor ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome and irregular cycles. A total of 49 women withdrew their consent, thus 1050 subjects were allocated to the GnRH antagonist (n = 534) and agonist protocol (n = 516), respectively. In total 1023 women started recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation, 528 in the GnRH antagonist group and 495 in the GnRH agonist group. All subjects were given a fixed rFSH dose of 150 IU or 225 IU according to age ≤36 years or >36 years, with the option to adjust dose at stimulation day 6. Clinical OHSS parameters were collected at oocyte retrieval, and Days 3 and 14 post-transfer. On-going pregnancy was determined by transvaginal ultrasonography at gestational weeks 7–9. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for reproductive outcomes, 1050 subjects were included. For the ITT analyses on OHSS 1023 subjects who started gonadotrophin stimulation were included.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
The incidence of severe OHSS [5.1% (27/528) versus 8.9% (44/495) (difference in proportion percentage point (Δpp) = −3.8pp; 95% CI: −7.1 to −0.4; P = 0.02)] and moderate OHSS [10.2% (54/528) versus 15.6% (77/495) (Δpp = −5.3pp; 95% CI: −9.6 to −1.0; P = 0.01) ] was significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared with the agonist group, respectively. In the GnRH antagonist and agonist group, respectively, 4.7% (25/528) versus 8.5% (42/495) women were seen by a physician due to OHSS (P = 0.01), and 1.7% (9/528) versus 3.6% (18/495) were admitted to hospital due to OHSS (P = 0.06). No women had ascites-puncture in the GnRH antagonist group versus 2.0% (10/495) in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.01). LBRs were 22.8% (122/534) versus 23.8% (123/516) (Δpp = −1.0pp; 95% CI: −6.3 to 4.3; P = 0.70) and OPRs were 24.9% (133/528) versus 26.2% (135/516) (Δpp = −1.3pp; 95% CI: −6.7 to 4.2; P = 0.64) per randomized subject in the GnRH antagonist versus agonist group, with a mean number of 1.1 versus 1.2 embryos transferred in the two groups. Pregnancy rates (PR) per randomized subject, per started gonadotrophin stimulation and per embryo transfer were all similar in the two groups.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
A possible limitation is the duration of the trial, with new methods, such as ‘freeze all’ and ‘GnRH agonist triggering’, being developed during the trial, the new methods were sought avoided, however a total number of 32 women had ‘freeze all’ and ‘GnRH agonist triggering’ was performed in three cases. Ultrasonic measurements were performed by different physicians and inter-observer bias may be present. Measures of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count, to estimate ovarian reserve and thus predict risk of OHSS, were not performed. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
The short GnRH antagonist protocol should be the protocol of choice for patients undergoing their first ART cycle in females <40 years of age including both low and high responders when an age-dependent initially fixed gonadotrophin dose is used, as an increased risk of severe OHSS and the associated complications is seen in the long GnRH agonist group and as PRs and LBRs are similar in the two groups. Patients at risk of OHSS particularly benefit from the short GnRH antagonist treatment as GnRH agonist triggering can be used.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS
An unrestricted research grant is funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA (MSD). The funders had no influence on the data collection, analyses or conclusions of the study. No conflict of interests to declare. Trial registration number: EudraCT #: 2008-005452-24. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00756028. Trial registration date: 18 September 2008. Date of first patient's enrolment: 14 January 2009. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?.STUDY QUESTIONIs the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?.There is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist group compared with the short GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?: In the most recent Cochrane review, the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a similar live birth rate (LBR), a similar on-going pregnancy rate (OPR), and a lower incidence of OHSS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.57) compared with the traditional GnRH agonist protocol. Previous trials comparing the two protocols mainly included selected patient populations, a limited number of patients and the applied OHSS criteria differed, making direct comparisons difficult. In two recent large meta-analyses, no significant differences in LBR (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.02) or in the incidence of severe OHSS were reported, while others found a lower LBR (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97) and a reduced risk of severe OHSS using the GnRH antagonist protocol (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40-0.88).SUMMARY ANSWERThere is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist group compared with the short GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?: In the most recent Cochrane review, the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a similar live birth rate (LBR), a similar on-going pregnancy rate (OPR), and a lower incidence of OHSS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.57) compared with the traditional GnRH agonist protocol. Previous trials comparing the two protocols mainly included selected patient populations, a limited number of patients and the applied OHSS criteria differed, making direct comparisons difficult. In two recent large meta-analyses, no significant differences in LBR (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.02) or in the incidence of severe OHSS were reported, while others found a lower LBR (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97) and a reduced risk of severe OHSS using the GnRH antagonist protocol (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40-0.88).Phase IV, dual-centre, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to either short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio and enrolled over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. This is a superiority study designed to detect a difference in severe OHSS, the primary outcome, between the two groups with a power of 80% and stratified for age, assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic and planned fertilization procedure (IVF/ICSI). The secondary aims were to compare rates of mild and moderate OHSS, positive plasma (p)-hCG, on-going pregnancy and live birth between the two arms. None of the women had undergone previous ART treatment.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATIONPhase IV, dual-centre, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to either short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio and enrolled over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. This is a superiority study designed to detect a difference in severe OHSS, the primary outcome, between the two groups with a power of 80% and stratified for age, assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic and planned fertilization procedure (IVF/ICSI). The secondary aims were to compare rates of mild and moderate OHSS, positive plasma (p)-hCG, on-going pregnancy and live birth between the two arms. None of the women had undergone previous ART treatment.All infertile women referred for their first IVF/ICSI at two public fertility clinics, less than 40 years of age and with no uterine malformations were asked to participate. A total of 1099 subjects were randomized, including women with poor ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome and irregular cycles. A total of 49 women withdrew their consent, thus 1050 subjects were allocated to the GnRH antagonist (n = 534) and agonist protocol (n = 516), respectively. In total 1023 women started recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation, 528 in the GnRH antagonist group and 495 in the GnRH agonist group. All subjects were given a fixed rFSH dose of 150 IU or 225 IU according to age ≤36 years or >36 years, with the option to adjust dose at stimulation day 6. Clinical OHSS parameters were collected at oocyte retrieval, and Days 3 and 14 post-transfer. On-going pregnancy was determined by transvaginal ultrasonography at gestational weeks 7-9. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for reproductive outcomes, 1050 subjects were included. For the ITT analyses on OHSS 1023 subjects who started gonadotrophin stimulation were included.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODSAll infertile women referred for their first IVF/ICSI at two public fertility clinics, less than 40 years of age and with no uterine malformations were asked to participate. A total of 1099 subjects were randomized, including women with poor ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome and irregular cycles. A total of 49 women withdrew their consent, thus 1050 subjects were allocated to the GnRH antagonist (n = 534) and agonist protocol (n = 516), respectively. In total 1023 women started recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation, 528 in the GnRH antagonist group and 495 in the GnRH agonist group. All subjects were given a fixed rFSH dose of 150 IU or 225 IU according to age ≤36 years or >36 years, with the option to adjust dose at stimulation day 6. Clinical OHSS parameters were collected at oocyte retrieval, and Days 3 and 14 post-transfer. On-going pregnancy was determined by transvaginal ultrasonography at gestational weeks 7-9. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for reproductive outcomes, 1050 subjects were included. For the ITT analyses on OHSS 1023 subjects who started gonadotrophin stimulation were included.The incidence of severe OHSS [5.1% (27/528) versus 8.9% (44/495) (difference in proportion percentage point (Δpp) = -3.8pp; 95% CI: -7.1 to -0.4; P = 0.02)] and moderate OHSS [10.2% (54/528) versus 15.6% (77/495) (Δpp = -5.3pp; 95% CI: -9.6 to -1.0; P = 0.01) ] was significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared with the agonist group, respectively. In the GnRH antagonist and agonist group, respectively, 4.7% (25/528) versus 8.5% (42/495) women were seen by a physician due to OHSS (P = 0.01), and 1.7% (9/528) versus 3.6% (18/495) were admitted to hospital due to OHSS (P = 0.06). No women had ascites-puncture in the GnRH antagonist group versus 2.0% (10/495) in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.01). LBRs were 22.8% (122/534) versus 23.8% (123/516) (Δpp = -1.0pp; 95% CI: -6.3 to 4.3; P = 0.70) and OPRs were 24.9% (133/528) versus 26.2% (135/516) (Δpp = -1.3pp; 95% CI: -6.7 to 4.2; P = 0.64) per randomized subject in the GnRH antagonist versus agonist group, with a mean number of 1.1 versus 1.2 embryos transferred in the two groups. Pregnancy rates (PR) per randomized subject, per started gonadotrophin stimulation and per embryo transfer were all similar in the two groups.MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCEThe incidence of severe OHSS [5.1% (27/528) versus 8.9% (44/495) (difference in proportion percentage point (Δpp) = -3.8pp; 95% CI: -7.1 to -0.4; P = 0.02)] and moderate OHSS [10.2% (54/528) versus 15.6% (77/495) (Δpp = -5.3pp; 95% CI: -9.6 to -1.0; P = 0.01) ] was significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared with the agonist group, respectively. In the GnRH antagonist and agonist group, respectively, 4.7% (25/528) versus 8.5% (42/495) women were seen by a physician due to OHSS (P = 0.01), and 1.7% (9/528) versus 3.6% (18/495) were admitted to hospital due to OHSS (P = 0.06). No women had ascites-puncture in the GnRH antagonist group versus 2.0% (10/495) in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.01). LBRs were 22.8% (122/534) versus 23.8% (123/516) (Δpp = -1.0pp; 95% CI: -6.3 to 4.3; P = 0.70) and OPRs were 24.9% (133/528) versus 26.2% (135/516) (Δpp = -1.3pp; 95% CI: -6.7 to 4.2; P = 0.64) per randomized subject in the GnRH antagonist versus agonist group, with a mean number of 1.1 versus 1.2 embryos transferred in the two groups. Pregnancy rates (PR) per randomized subject, per started gonadotrophin stimulation and per embryo transfer were all similar in the two groups.A possible limitation is the duration of the trial, with new methods, such as 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering', being developed during the trial, the new methods were sought avoided, however a total number of 32 women had 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering' was performed in three cases. Ultrasonic measurements were performed by different physicians and inter-observer bias may be present. Measures of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count, to estimate ovarian reserve and thus predict risk of OHSS, were not performed. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization.LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTIONA possible limitation is the duration of the trial, with new methods, such as 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering', being developed during the trial, the new methods were sought avoided, however a total number of 32 women had 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering' was performed in three cases. Ultrasonic measurements were performed by different physicians and inter-observer bias may be present. Measures of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count, to estimate ovarian reserve and thus predict risk of OHSS, were not performed. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization.The short GnRH antagonist protocol should be the protocol of choice for patients undergoing their first ART cycle in females <40 years of age including both low and high responders when an age-dependent in Abstract STUDY QUESTION Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?. SUMMARY ANSWER There is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist group compared with the short GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY? In the most recent Cochrane review, the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a similar live birth rate (LBR), a similar on-going pregnancy rate (OPR), and a lower incidence of OHSS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33–0.57) compared with the traditional GnRH agonist protocol. Previous trials comparing the two protocols mainly included selected patient populations, a limited number of patients and the applied OHSS criteria differed, making direct comparisons difficult. In two recent large meta-analyses, no significant differences in LBR (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72–1.02) or in the incidence of severe OHSS were reported, while others found a lower LBR (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68–0.97) and a reduced risk of severe OHSS using the GnRH antagonist protocol (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40–0.88). STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Phase IV, dual-centre, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to either short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio and enrolled over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. This is a superiority study designed to detect a difference in severe OHSS, the primary outcome, between the two groups with a power of 80% and stratified for age, assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic and planned fertilization procedure (IVF/ICSI). The secondary aims were to compare rates of mild and moderate OHSS, positive plasma (p)-hCG, on-going pregnancy and live birth between the two arms. None of the women had undergone previous ART treatment. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS All infertile women referred for their first IVF/ICSI at two public fertility clinics, less than 40 years of age and with no uterine malformations were asked to participate. A total of 1099 subjects were randomized, including women with poor ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome and irregular cycles. A total of 49 women withdrew their consent, thus 1050 subjects were allocated to the GnRH antagonist (n = 534) and agonist protocol (n = 516), respectively. In total 1023 women started recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation, 528 in the GnRH antagonist group and 495 in the GnRH agonist group. All subjects were given a fixed rFSH dose of 150 IU or 225 IU according to age ≤36 years or >36 years, with the option to adjust dose at stimulation day 6. Clinical OHSS parameters were collected at oocyte retrieval, and Days 3 and 14 post-transfer. On-going pregnancy was determined by transvaginal ultrasonography at gestational weeks 7–9. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for reproductive outcomes, 1050 subjects were included. For the ITT analyses on OHSS 1023 subjects who started gonadotrophin stimulation were included. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The incidence of severe OHSS [5.1% (27/528) versus 8.9% (44/495) (difference in proportion percentage point (Δpp) = −3.8pp; 95% CI: −7.1 to −0.4; P = 0.02)] and moderate OHSS [10.2% (54/528) versus 15.6% (77/495) (Δpp = −5.3pp; 95% CI: −9.6 to −1.0; P = 0.01) ] was significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared with the agonist group, respectively. In the GnRH antagonist and agonist group, respectively, 4.7% (25/528) versus 8.5% (42/495) women were seen by a physician due to OHSS (P = 0.01), and 1.7% (9/528) versus 3.6% (18/495) were admitted to hospital due to OHSS (P = 0.06). No women had ascites-puncture in the GnRH antagonist group versus 2.0% (10/495) in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.01). LBRs were 22.8% (122/534) versus 23.8% (123/516) (Δpp = −1.0pp; 95% CI: −6.3 to 4.3; P = 0.70) and OPRs were 24.9% (133/528) versus 26.2% (135/516) (Δpp = −1.3pp; 95% CI: −6.7 to 4.2; P = 0.64) per randomized subject in the GnRH antagonist versus agonist group, with a mean number of 1.1 versus 1.2 embryos transferred in the two groups. Pregnancy rates (PR) per randomized subject, per started gonadotrophin stimulation and per embryo transfer were all similar in the two groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION A possible limitation is the duration of the trial, with new methods, such as ‘freeze all’ and ‘GnRH agonist triggering’, being developed during the trial, the new methods were sought avoided, however a total number of 32 women had ‘freeze all’ and ‘GnRH agonist triggering’ was performed in three cases. Ultrasonic measurements were performed by different physicians and inter-observer bias may be present. Measures of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count, to estimate ovarian reserve and thus predict risk of OHSS, were not performed. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The short GnRH antagonist protocol should be the protocol of choice for patients undergoing their first ART cycle in females <40 years of age including both low and high responders when an age-dependent initially fixed gonadotrophin dose is used, as an increased risk of severe OHSS and the associated complications is seen in the long GnRH agonist group and as PRs and LBRs are similar in the two groups. Patients at risk of OHSS particularly benefit from the short GnRH antagonist treatment as GnRH agonist triggering can be used. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS An unrestricted research grant is funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA (MSD). The funders had no influence on the data collection, analyses or conclusions of the study. No conflict of interests to declare. Trial registration number: EudraCT #: 2008-005452-24. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00756028. Trial registration date: 18 September 2008. Date of first patient's enrolment: 14 January 2009. Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?. There is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist group compared with the short GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?: In the most recent Cochrane review, the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a similar live birth rate (LBR), a similar on-going pregnancy rate (OPR), and a lower incidence of OHSS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.57) compared with the traditional GnRH agonist protocol. Previous trials comparing the two protocols mainly included selected patient populations, a limited number of patients and the applied OHSS criteria differed, making direct comparisons difficult. In two recent large meta-analyses, no significant differences in LBR (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.02) or in the incidence of severe OHSS were reported, while others found a lower LBR (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97) and a reduced risk of severe OHSS using the GnRH antagonist protocol (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40-0.88). Phase IV, dual-centre, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to either short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio and enrolled over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. This is a superiority study designed to detect a difference in severe OHSS, the primary outcome, between the two groups with a power of 80% and stratified for age, assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic and planned fertilization procedure (IVF/ICSI). The secondary aims were to compare rates of mild and moderate OHSS, positive plasma (p)-hCG, on-going pregnancy and live birth between the two arms. None of the women had undergone previous ART treatment. All infertile women referred for their first IVF/ICSI at two public fertility clinics, less than 40 years of age and with no uterine malformations were asked to participate. A total of 1099 subjects were randomized, including women with poor ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome and irregular cycles. A total of 49 women withdrew their consent, thus 1050 subjects were allocated to the GnRH antagonist (n = 534) and agonist protocol (n = 516), respectively. In total 1023 women started recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation, 528 in the GnRH antagonist group and 495 in the GnRH agonist group. All subjects were given a fixed rFSH dose of 150 IU or 225 IU according to age ≤36 years or >36 years, with the option to adjust dose at stimulation day 6. Clinical OHSS parameters were collected at oocyte retrieval, and Days 3 and 14 post-transfer. On-going pregnancy was determined by transvaginal ultrasonography at gestational weeks 7-9. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for reproductive outcomes, 1050 subjects were included. For the ITT analyses on OHSS 1023 subjects who started gonadotrophin stimulation were included. The incidence of severe OHSS [5.1% (27/528) versus 8.9% (44/495) (difference in proportion percentage point (Δpp) = -3.8pp; 95% CI: -7.1 to -0.4; P = 0.02)] and moderate OHSS [10.2% (54/528) versus 15.6% (77/495) (Δpp = -5.3pp; 95% CI: -9.6 to -1.0; P = 0.01) ] was significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared with the agonist group, respectively. In the GnRH antagonist and agonist group, respectively, 4.7% (25/528) versus 8.5% (42/495) women were seen by a physician due to OHSS (P = 0.01), and 1.7% (9/528) versus 3.6% (18/495) were admitted to hospital due to OHSS (P = 0.06). No women had ascites-puncture in the GnRH antagonist group versus 2.0% (10/495) in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.01). LBRs were 22.8% (122/534) versus 23.8% (123/516) (Δpp = -1.0pp; 95% CI: -6.3 to 4.3; P = 0.70) and OPRs were 24.9% (133/528) versus 26.2% (135/516) (Δpp = -1.3pp; 95% CI: -6.7 to 4.2; P = 0.64) per randomized subject in the GnRH antagonist versus agonist group, with a mean number of 1.1 versus 1.2 embryos transferred in the two groups. Pregnancy rates (PR) per randomized subject, per started gonadotrophin stimulation and per embryo transfer were all similar in the two groups. A possible limitation is the duration of the trial, with new methods, such as 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering', being developed during the trial, the new methods were sought avoided, however a total number of 32 women had 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering' was performed in three cases. Ultrasonic measurements were performed by different physicians and inter-observer bias may be present. Measures of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count, to estimate ovarian reserve and thus predict risk of OHSS, were not performed. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization. The short GnRH antagonist protocol should be the protocol of choice for patients undergoing their first ART cycle in females <40 years of age including both low and high responders when an age-dependent initially fixed gonadotrophin dose is used, as an increased risk of severe OHSS and the associated complications is seen in the long GnRH agonist group and as PRs and LBRs are similar in the two groups. Patients at risk of OHSS particularly benefit from the short GnRH antagonist treatment as GnRH agonist triggering can be used. An unrestricted research grant is funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA (MSD). The funders had no influence on the data collection, analyses or conclusions of the study. No conflict of interests to declare. EudraCT #: 2008-005452-24. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00756028. Trial registration date: 18 September 2008. Date of first patient's enrolment: 14 January 2009. |
Author | Toftager, M. Roskær, J. Holland, T. Løssl, K. Prætorius, L. Pinborg, A. Bryndorf, T. Zedeler, A. Bogstad, J. Nilas, L. |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: M. surname: Toftager fullname: Toftager, M. email: mette.toftager@gmail.com organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark – sequence: 2 givenname: J. surname: Bogstad fullname: Bogstad, J. organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark – sequence: 3 givenname: T. surname: Bryndorf fullname: Bryndorf, T. organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark – sequence: 4 givenname: K. surname: Løssl fullname: Løssl, K. organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark – sequence: 5 givenname: J. surname: Roskær fullname: Roskær, J. organization: 2 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic, Aalborg University Hospital, Dronninglund, Denmark – sequence: 6 givenname: T. surname: Holland fullname: Holland, T. organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark – sequence: 7 givenname: L. surname: Prætorius fullname: Prætorius, L. organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark – sequence: 8 givenname: A. surname: Zedeler fullname: Zedeler, A. organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark – sequence: 9 givenname: L. surname: Nilas fullname: Nilas, L. organization: 3 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Section of General Gynaecology, Hvidovre University Hospital, Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark – sequence: 10 givenname: A. surname: Pinborg fullname: Pinborg, A. organization: 1 Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Fertility Clinic Section 455, Hvidovre University Hospital, Kettegård Alle 30, Hvidovre, Copenhagen 2650, Denmark |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27060174$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNpFUctOwzAQtFARfcCRK_KRS6idxGnMDVX0IVVCKoVr5MemNSR2iJOi_gJfTVALnHY1OzMa7QxRzzoLCF1TckcJj8a7tqyhGmv4JIyeoQGNExKEESM9NCBhkgaUJrSPht6_EdKtaXKB-uGEJIRO4gH6Whv_jl2OPeyhBuz2ojbC4t2hgto3pmwL0RhnsT9YXbsSsLF4btcLLGwjts4a3-BO6Vt_gk9YVbvGKVfc4_V004lU0Wpjt5gSRnBuOm-8fJ2Nl9PnJVYHVYC_ROe5KDxcneYIvcweN9NFsHqaL6cPq8B1iZtAp0yqVGolIpAs10QC55BwRiDO41CHkjPJeUw51UqrNKG5lFJNAEJBWRJHI3R79O0ifrTgm6w0XkFRCAuu9RmdcBKzkMWso96cqK0sQWdVbUpRH7Lf__17ubb6u1KS_VSTHavJjtVE358khMM |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com 2016 The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com 2016 – notice: The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. |
DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
DOI | 10.1093/humrep/dew051 |
DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine Anatomy & Physiology Pharmacy, Therapeutics, & Pharmacology |
EISSN | 1460-2350 |
EndPage | 1264 |
ExternalDocumentID | 27060174 10.1093/humrep/dew051 |
Genre | Multicenter Study Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Journal Article Clinical Trial, Phase IV |
GroupedDBID | --- -E4 .2P .I3 .XZ .ZR 0R~ 1TH 29I 2WC 4.4 482 48X 53G 5GY 5RE 5VS 5WA 5WD 70D AABZA AACZT AAIMJ AAJKP AAJQQ AAMDB AAMVS AAOGV AAPNW AAPQZ AAPXW AARHZ AASNB AAUAY AAUQX AAVAP AAVLN ABEUO ABIXL ABJNI ABKDP ABMNT ABNHQ ABNKS ABPTD ABQLI ABQNK ABWST ABXVV ABZBJ ACCCW ACGFS ACPRK ACUFI ACUTO ACYHN ADBBV ADEYI ADEZT ADGKP ADGZP ADHKW ADHZD ADIPN ADJQC ADOCK ADQBN ADRIX ADRTK ADVEK ADYVW ADZXQ AEGPL AEJOX AEKSI AELWJ AEMDU AENEX AENZO AEPUE AETBJ AEWNT AFFZL AFGWE AFIYH AFOFC AFXAL AFXEN AGINJ AGKEF AGQXC AGSYK AGUTN AHMBA AHXPO AIJHB AJEEA AKWXX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQC APIBT APWMN ARIXL ATGXG AXUDD AYOIW BAWUL BAYMD BCRHZ BEYMZ BHONS BQDIO BSWAC BTRTY BVRKM C45 CDBKE CS3 CZ4 DAKXR DIK DILTD DU5 D~K E3Z EBS EE~ EJD EMOBN ENERS F5P F9B FECEO FHSFR FLUFQ FOEOM FOTVD FQBLK GAUVT GJXCC GX1 H13 H5~ HAR HW0 HZ~ IOX J21 JXSIZ KAQDR KBUDW KOP KQ8 KSI KSN L7B M-Z M49 MHKGH ML0 N9A NGC NLBLG NOMLY NOYVH NU- NVLIB O9- OAUYM OAWHX OBOKY OCZFY ODMLO OJQWA OJZSN OK1 OPAEJ OVD OWPYF P2P PAFKI PEELM PQQKQ Q1. Q5Y R44 RD5 RIG ROL ROX ROZ RUSNO RW1 RXO TCN TCURE TEORI TJX TLC TR2 W8F WH7 WOQ X7H YAYTL YKOAZ YXANX ZKX ~91 .55 .GJ 3O- 6.Y AAPGJ AAWDT AAYOK ABDFA ABEJV ABGNP ABNGD ABQTQ ABSAR ABSMQ ABVGC ACFRR ACPQN ACUTJ ACZBC AEHUL AEKPW AFFNX AFFQV AFSHK AFYAG AGKRT AGMDO AHMMS ANFBD AQDSO AQKUS ASAOO ASPBG ATDFG ATTQO AVWKF AZFZN BZKNY C1A CAG CGR COF CUY CVF CXTWN DFGAJ ECM EIF EIHJH ELUNK FEDTE HVGLF MBLQV MBTAY NPM NTWIH O0~ OHT O~Y PB- QBD RNI RZF RZO TMA X7M ZGI ZXP 7X8 ABPQP ABXZS ADNBA AEMQT AJBYB AJNCP ALXQX |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-o174t-d85bc8bdca3eb5fd0be99e6950e4f42d2b95b994191dcdc861fbbbc7ee2a15643 |
ISSN | 0268-1161 1460-2350 |
IngestDate | Sun Sep 28 15:03:00 EDT 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:41:38 EST 2025 Wed Sep 11 04:47:55 EDT 2024 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 6 |
Keywords | ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome GnRH agonist live birth rate pregnancy rate IVF on-going pregnancy rate infertility GnRH antagonist |
Language | English |
License | The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. |
LinkModel | OpenURL |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-o174t-d85bc8bdca3eb5fd0be99e6950e4f42d2b95b994191dcdc861fbbbc7ee2a15643 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 |
PMID | 27060174 |
PQID | 1790452545 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
PageCount | 12 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_1790452545 pubmed_primary_27060174 oup_primary_10_1093_humrep_dew051 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 20160601 2016-06-00 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2016-06-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 06 year: 2016 text: 20160601 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2010 |
PublicationPlace | England |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England |
PublicationTitle | Human reproduction (Oxford) |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Hum Reprod |
PublicationYear | 2016 |
Publisher | Oxford University Press |
Publisher_xml | – name: Oxford University Press |
SSID | ssj0016186 |
Score | 2.5297492 |
Snippet | Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in... Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI... |
SourceID | proquest pubmed oup |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 1253 |
SubjectTerms | Chorionic Gonadotropin - blood Clinical Protocols Female Fertilization in Vitro - methods Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone - administration & dosage Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone - agonists Humans Incidence Live Birth Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome - epidemiology Pregnancy Pregnancy Rate Risk Assessment Time Factors |
Title | Risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol: RCT including 1050 first IVF/ICSI cycles |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27060174 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1790452545 |
Volume | 31 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVAFT databaseName: Open Access Digital Library customDbUrl: eissn: 1460-2350 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0016186 issn: 0268-1161 databaseCode: KQ8 dateStart: 19960101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: http://grweb.coalliance.org/oadl/oadl.html providerName: Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries – providerCode: PRVBFR databaseName: Free Medical Journals customDbUrl: eissn: 1460-2350 dateEnd: 20240930 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0016186 issn: 0268-1161 databaseCode: DIK dateStart: 19960101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: http://www.freemedicaljournals.com providerName: Flying Publisher – providerCode: PRVFQY databaseName: GFMER Free Medical Journals customDbUrl: eissn: 1460-2350 dateEnd: 20240930 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0016186 issn: 0268-1161 databaseCode: GX1 dateStart: 19960101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: http://www.gfmer.ch/Medical_journals/Free_medical.php providerName: Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1tb9MwELbKkBBfEHTAxpuMhPala5v3xnwbhdEOhtDI0L5F8Uu2SjRBbQMqP4Gfxq_i7HPTsAIafImiU-zWuSf23fnuMSHPZBxHmd7VVVkudOgm6PKcgZcSMJkppXhkGPiO30Wj0-DoLDxrtX40spaqBe-Jb7-tK_kfrYIM9KqrZP9Bs3WnIIB70C9cQcNwvZKOT2xeOKxuagbO_xdwfOF7vQDfEoy6ydQezVXTEujgxuviZNSB15mdl5o0t6PTMqq5FVuZJm8oASEmW26YQDPxqTLVL2AnOZ18Ar13xh8P4Z-Phx_GHbHUuXVNOxf3BjRjpiGURYzFWJ3YCD4ksAhoEg0Tlu3VoYHyHGxWA72jtXAGgyhnhkMyqaVv9Ub_ixisZTNj9ZpBDDdaJ1v9rTiyMRd6ETi7LvK29xTO1UHkdD0feWtXk7ldUiYbMzMYcn5jlXc9JE_fWEGQXeuimsIrghupvjqWEfdXWu4_PnuNXPcGUaRP03g5flPvaOlzCTDehwOxfK_QRR876GPzS4WWG_6OsXuS2-SWdVjoAaLvDmmpok22D4psUU6XdI-aFGKzN9MmN45tpkab7L1HTvTlPk3WJX7zfdOiZktfbpPvGsS0zCmCmFoQ08sgpisQ00lBNVrpGsQUQWzFVrYC8XMKEKY1hKmGMDUQpgDhvgYwRQDfJaeHr5LhqGsPCOmW4EgvujIOuYi5FJmveJhLhyvGVMRCRwV54EmPs5AzFrjMlUKKOHJzzrkYKOVlmiTJv0e2irJQO4Q6Gdjpig1EHmSBiAULY-HFeci4I1nuyV3yFNSSfkYKmBRTN_wUVZei6uCZldJSmKT1zltWqLKap5oGTycQBOEuuY_arLvyNH8VDOfBFX7hIbm5_noeka3FrFKPwShe8CcGbT8ByJK8zg |
linkProvider | Flying Publisher |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Risk+of+severe+ovarian+hyperstimulation+syndrome+in+GnRH+antagonist+versus+GnRH+agonist+protocol%3A+RCT+including+1050+first+IVF%2FICSI+cycles&rft.jtitle=Human+reproduction+%28Oxford%29&rft.au=Toftager%2C+M.&rft.au=Bogstad%2C+J.&rft.au=Bryndorf%2C+T.&rft.au=L%C3%B8ssl%2C+K.&rft.date=2016-06-01&rft.pub=Oxford+University+Press&rft.issn=0268-1161&rft.eissn=1460-2350&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1253&rft.epage=1264&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093%2Fhumrep%2Fdew051&rft.externalDocID=10.1093%2Fhumrep%2Fdew051 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0268-1161&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0268-1161&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0268-1161&client=summon |